Expand Quote
Expand Quote
but wasn't he also on his way to blow up a local anarchist collective on that night?
No.
"Vikernes was arrested on 19 August 1993 in Bergen.[42] The police found 150 kg of explosives and 3,000 rounds of ammunition in his home.[52] According to the Encyclopedia of White Power, Vikernes "intended to blow up Blitz House, the radical leftist and anarchist enclave in Oslo",[22] a plan that "was reportedly on the verge of execution."[22] In an article originally published in 1999, Kevin Coogan also mentioned Vikernes' alleged intent to "destroy an Oslo-based punk anti-fascist squat called Blitz House,"[53] and stated "Vikernes may have felt that he had no choice but to kill Euronymous before bombing Blitz House because 'the Communist' would almost certainly have opposed such an act."[53] Vikernes denied these claims in a 2009 interview, saying he was collecting explosives and ammunition "in order to defend Norway if we were attacked any time."
Yeah, I guess I probably shouldn't trust anything from a publication entitled 'the Encyclopedia of White Power', but I did hear it from somewhere back in the day. Him denying the claims is hardly trustworthy either though so...
This is kind of interesting in an “alternate history” sort of way. Like if Varg had killed leftists and burned down a leftist organization instead of killing his hand mate and burning churches, would his reputation be different? I think it might be.
A lot of people consider the church burnings to be cool and edgy, but they don’t understand the ethnonationalist/neo-traditionalist ideology underlying it. And they DEFINITELY don’t understand the connection between ethnonationalism/neo-traditionalism and anti-communism.
So back to my original point: if Varg was known as the guy that killed a bunch of anarchists and communists, would his reputation be different? The edgy punk and skater crowds that currently enjoy his music would probably be a bit more upset about anti-left-wing violence than they are about anti-christian violence.